HtC no LikeY Bombers

[lyric1]

Cant wait to see the DamBusters Lancs rolling bombs into the cvs.

That would be kind of interesting.

[Bronk]

First off, bombers are under utilized at this point as it is. And will continue to be so as long as any fighter can up with endless numbers of 1k bombs and rockets. While it was possible  for fighters to carry 1k bombs, until late in the war they just were not that commonly used "by fighters"  If you want to get strategic gameplay back, fighters need to be reined in on endless ord.

Interesting, how about when ords reach 0% 4 engined buffs still able to get ords? Or something like that.

[Max]

By the way , whens the last time you even flown a bomb?

<----------- {Slim Pickens voice}  Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeHaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[thndregg]

Man, I feel like there have been several very aggressive new additions to the BBS.

I agree. It's too easy to be an anonymous a******. As far as bombers are concerned, perk 'em, or don't perk 'em- I don't care. I've got 15K of perks saved after 4 yrs. of buff sorties. I love bombers, especially American muscle, but I'll fly anything in any arena, and fly it the way it was historically designed for. If I or my mission gets obliterated by the enemy, so be it. Patience & planning is key, but the fun is still there.

BTW, if you must "Lancstuka" anything, use a Ju-88. It actually has the historic capability to do such bombing.

[Anaxogoras]

Every sortie I fly in b24s I can count on bailing because I certainly am not coming home.

What, do you go in at 10k ft?  You don't climb high enough.

[VonMessa]

Actually if you could read , you would have realized that I said drop the nuke meaning dont add the nuke. Nuke is a bomb no one wants which is fine. So dont add it and just add the bomber. WE NEED MORE BOMBERS. Not the german or italian crap , mostly the american bombers. German and italian are secondary for when ENY hits.

Yet another person in need of the lifeguard......

[hammer]

First off, bombers are under utilized at this point as it is. And will continue to be so as long as any fighter can up with endless numbers of 1k bombs and rockets. While it was possible  for fighters to carry 1k bombs, until late in the war they just were not that commonly used "by fighters"  If you want to get strategic gameplay back, fighters need to be reined in on endless ord.

Second, a 2 week dweeb trying to lancstuka really isn't all that dangerous.
He hasn't got the skills to compete 1 on 1 with fighters. So he's just out to have some fun.
Secret is to make it more fun NOT to lancstuka.

Third, bombers get zero recognition for doing what they do. They pad their score (who cares) the accumulate more perks they can't spend (ar234 whoopie, not) they get credit for A2A kills instead of objects destroyed. You want to fix the bomber problem, start by making them a necessary part of the game in order to take bases. Then give them some respect "when" and only when its deserved.

Could be as simple as no points granted unless the plane lives x amount of time after bombs are dropped.
For true level bombers dropping when more than 5 degrees off level could and should damage the plane dropping.
If it happens, it should take out the drones as well.

Perking the larger bombers is only going to make this problem worse.
Giving the bomber pilots grief is whats caused this whole mess in the first place.

As you sow, so shall ye reap. Well AH you are reaping a bumper crop of bomber hell.

Enjoy

Absolutely agree with limiting the ordnance carried by fighters, level bombers receiving damage if not level during drop and making bombers necessary for success. Not sure perking the big-boys would cause problems if the first three were put into place properly. I would also like to see some type of air-start for the heavy bombers (10k or so with the appropriate amount of fuel used) just to eliminate the ridiculous amount of time required to climb to alt. I suspect that is one reason we see them used as tac bombers instead of in their traditional role.

Regards,

Hammer

[JAGED]

By the way , whens the last time you even flown a bomb?

<----------- {Slim Pickens voice}  Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeHaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[Boozeman]

First off, bombers are under utilized at this point as it is. And will continue to be so as long as any fighter can up with endless numbers of 1k bombs and rockets. While it was possible  for fighters to carry 1k bombs, until late in the war they just were not that commonly used "by fighters"  If you want to get strategic gameplay back, fighters need to be reined in on endless ord.

Not only that, but fighter sized projectiles have a hugely exaggerated effect on ground structures. Each bullet being worth multiple times of it's own weight in high explosives does render buffing indeed almost worthless. A 3400 round P-47 does almost carry 4000 lbs worth of ordnance just in ammo, or almost 1,6 times the amount it can load as bombs.

 

[Max]

Good un JAGED 

[Lusche]

Not only that, but fighter sized projectiles have a hugely exaggerated effect on ground structures. Each bullet being worth multiple times of it's own weight in high explosives does render buffing indeed almost worthless. A 3400 round P-47 does almost carry 4000 lbs worth of ordnance just in ammo, or almost 1,6 times the amount it can load as bombs.

 

The destructive power carried by a few selected popular attackers. Bombs, rockets & gun ammo added up:




Who needs buffs to level ground structures?

[Bronk]

The destructive power carried by a few selected popular attackers. Bombs, rockets & gun ammo added up:

(Image removed from quote.)


Who needs buffs to level ground structures?

Time for perked ord options?

[Denholm]

*Chants* HE-111!!! HE-111!!! HE-111!!!

[Helm]

Why doesn't HTC give us more bombers to use the 2,000 perkies we have. Seriously , the a26 , b29 drop the nuke just like they dropped the 22,000lb lanc bomb , ar232 , etc. Many classic bombers that should be in there. Not saying that there top of the line bombers , just cool ones. If there gona throw in the paper weight KI67s , dont see why dont they put in some of the american muscle and other types.

Has it occur ed to you that the Runways in the game are NOT long enuff to get a B29 into the air??? 

They would also have to redo every airfield on every map to accommodate the B29 ....thats a hell of a alot of work.

Also from most accounts I have read the b29 was a real handful to fly.  So if you get it....dont expect easy street!


Lastly why do we need a bomb (nuke) that there where only 2 used in the entire war? ....ah hello?? .....A far more worthy request would for incendiary bombs.  These were used in Europe and in the Pacific alot!


Helm ...out

[Karnak]

Ki-67 is quite a nice bomber and quite useful for many roles in AH.  I bet you just haven't even tried it or thought about it.

I do think that the 1,000lbers should be removed as options on the fighters though as they were rarely used.  It also seems that small caliber gun damage on structures needs to be reduced.

Perk bombers yet to be added:

A-26 Invader
B-29A Superfortress
Mosquito B.Mk XVI

Good bombers for Late War MA that could be added:

Do217E
H8K2 "Emily"
Halifax
He177A-5 Grief
Ju188A-1
P.108
Pe-2
Tu-2

Need bombers for gap filling:

DB-7
G4M2 "Betty"
He111
Pe-2
Wellington B.Mk III